Unleashing the Power of Diverse Thought: How a Future Marketplace of Large Language Models could Propel Corporate Innovation and Safeguard Intellectual Property

🔮 A Personal Prelude: A Cautionary Tale

On a seemingly ordinary weekend, I found myself ensnared in the chilling narrative of a documentary chronicling the tragic fate of a family marred by generations of incest. As the hours of binge-watching unfolded, a sudden, unanticipated parallel began to dawn upon me, bridging the tragic human narrative on screen to the ongoing discourse in corporate circles around Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Large Language Models (LLMs).

The documentary served as a stark, visual exposition of the devastating consequences of a closed genetic pool, a narrative that resonated ominously with the fears echoed in recent conversations I’d had regarding the creation of a private company LLM. The intent behind such a closed system was to shield the company’s intellectual property (IP) from the prying eyes of the world, a protective barrier symbolized by the company’s decision to block access to ChatGPT on corporate computers.

This narrative served as a catalyst, propelling me into a deeper exploration of the intellectual ecosystem we are on the verge of cultivating with the advent of AI. The fear of exposing one’s IP, while valid, seemed to cast a shadow of restraint on the boundless potential of what could be achieved with the melding of minds—both human and artificial.

Now, as we venture into the structured discourse of this article, this personal anecdote serves as a testament to the critical juncture we find ourselves at, balancing the scales of protective isolation against the fertile grounds of collaborative innovation.

🔄 Embracing the AI Exogamy:

Creating a company-specific LLM might seem like a lucrative endeavor, yet it subtly harbors a risk of intellectual stagnation, akin to a closed genetic system devoid of variation. The motivation behind crafting proprietary LLMs often stems from a desire to empower employees with the full breadth of a company’s knowledge and intellectual property (IP), albeit with an accompanying fear of exposing such IP to the world through public LLMs. Conversely, employing externally developed LLMs for content generation opens the door to diverse, even contradictory, ideation—akin to introducing genetic variance, nurturing a robust, evolving intellectual lineage.

🛒 The LLM Marketplace of Tomorrow:

Envision a marketplace where firms can acquire specialized LLMs to augment their internal company LLM. Be it an Innovation LLM, an Academic Research LLM, a Culture LLM, or any realm a company wishes to explore, these external LLMs could significantly impact the language, ideas, behaviors, and content generated by users interacting with the company’s LLM through daily prompts. It’s akin to cross-pollinating a garden with various species of flora, each bringing its unique essence, promoting a rich, vibrant ecosystem of thought.

🎩 The Corporate Alchemy:

In the corporate crucible, the intersection of external LLMs with a company’s unique brand voice and industry jargon transmutes AI from a mere tool to a dynamic ally. It fosters a synergy that fuels innovative solutions, aligning with evolving corporate needs and market dynamics.

⚠️ Dissecting the ‘Easy Button’ Fallacy:

The journey of employing LLMs is far from the illusory ‘easy button’ many envisage. It demands a meticulous understanding of the model’s capabilities, the task at hand, and an ongoing engagement to tune the LLM in resonance with evolving corporate needs. Not to mention, a substantial financial output is necessitated for servers and processing power to run the LLM, adding another layer of complexity to the endeavor.

💫 The Superpower Awaits:

Mastering the interaction with LLMs unveils a superpower—the ability to harness a cornucopia of ideas from the AI, nurturing an environment of continuous intellectual rejuvenation. However, akin to any superpower, it mandates a deep understanding, a will to evolve, and a nuanced application.

🔚 Conclusion:

As corporations navigate the AI epoch, avoiding the pitfall of intellectual stagnation becomes paramount. Engaging with external LLMs emerges as a vital approach, enabling firms to dance with the genetic variance that AI offers, fostering a culture of innovation, evolution, and robust problem-solving.

---

 Note to reader:   The above is an article I wrote and believed in fully. The following is a simple prompt to challenge my beliefs and writing to expose bias, risks, and any of the above might be flawed in principle.

 Enter Red Teaming:  The results of your Red Team exercise will uncover potential risks and misinformation, allowing you to explore and think critically about the points presented to you. This exercise is crucial to mitigating risks before sharing your ideas publicly. It is similar to a premortem but free from human bias and kindness.

• Open a new ChatGPT chat.
• Enter “Red Team the following.”
• Paste in your draft article or text.

Red Team this for me

The results.

---

🎯 The Results of the Red Team

Certainly, Cam. Engaging in a Red Team perspective will entail challenging the assumptions and providing alternative viewpoints to the ideas presented in your draft. Here are some points to consider:

1. Complexity and Practicality of Implementation:

The proposal of a marketplace for specialized LLMs is innovative but could be quite complex to implement. How will the interoperability between different LLMs be ensured? How would companies navigate the myriad of legal, technical, and security challenges that might arise from integrating external LLMs?

1. Intellectual Property (IP) Protection:

While the narrative discusses the fear of IP exposure, it may not delve deeply into how the proposed marketplace would ensure the protection of a company’s IP when integrating external LLMs. There’s a need for a robust framework to manage the exchange of information while protecting sensitive data.

1. Financial Feasibility:

The draft mentions the substantial financial output required for servers and processing power. However, the financial feasibility of acquiring external LLMs and the return on investment could be further explored.

1. Quality Control and Standardization:

With a marketplace of diverse LLMs, ensuring a standard of quality and consistency could be challenging. How will the quality of these external LLMs be vetted? How would they be standardized to ensure they meet the specific needs and quality standards of different companies?

1. Long-term Maintenance and Support:

The ongoing engagement to tune the LLM is mentioned, but there might be a need to delve into the long-term maintenance, support, and updates required for these models to remain relevant and effective over time.

1. Effectiveness of AI Integration:

The effectiveness of integrating AI and LLMs in corporate settings could be further substantiated with real-world examples or case studies, if available.

1. Resistance to Change:

There could be resistance from employees or stakeholders who might be wary of integrating AI or external influences into the company’s intellectual domain. Addressing change management and ensuring a smooth transition would be crucial.

1. Ethical Implications:

The ethical implications of blending AI with human decision-making in a corporate setting, especially when influenced by external LLMs, might need a thorough examination.

These points aim to provide a more holistic view and possibly guide further refinement of your narrative, ensuring it covers a broad spectrum of considerations inherent in the ambitious endeavor of navigating the AI epoch through LLMs.